Arminian Theology

Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities
Roger E. Olson
IVP 2006

This is a very interesting book that claims to introduce Arminian theology as it really is and not as it's opponents too often portray it. As such, Olson is adamant that Arminianism is at least as much a legitimate option for evangelical Christians as Calvinism (and in his view more so).

I have to admit that I was intrigued as I have till now based my judgment of Arminianism almost exclusively on Calvinist resources. I also have to admit serious ignorance of what Arminianism actually teaches. I honestly thought that Arminianism more or less taught simply the opposite to the five points of Calvinism and was surprised that evangelical Arminians affirm total depravity and some also affirm perseverance of the saints (two out of the five points of Calvinism). In this respect, Arminianism can be seen as a kind of moderate Reformed theology rather than the antithesis of it.

Olson's book goes through a series of ten "myths" about Arminianism and seeks to dispel each one. The book focuses a lot on historical theology and unfortunately there is very little biblical exegesis. I don't say this to score a cheap point. It is not a reflection on Arminianism's inability to base its conclusions on the biblical text. I simply think that Olson has chosen to focus on what some of Arminianism's most important theologians have taught. He makes the point that true Arminianism is both misunderstood by its opponents and perhaps by many who claim to embrace it. This confusion amplifies the problem, but the fact is that true Arminianism is more Calvinistic (if I can put it that way) than many of it's proponents think. Olson says that much of modern day evangelicalism is semi-Pelagian not truly Arminian. The problem is that Calvinists looking on, think that when they see semi-Pelagianism they are actually seeing Arminianism, and so Arminianism is semi-Pelagian. But Olson makes a good case for distinguishing sharply between the two. I found Olson's counterpoints a real eye-opener.

The "myths" that Olson seeks to dispel are that:

1. Arminianism is simply the opposite of Calvinism/Reformed theology
2. A hybrid of Calvinism and Arminianism is possible
3. Arminianism is not an orthodox evangelical option
4. The heart of Arminianism is belief in free will
5. Arminian theology denies the sovereignty of God
6. Arminianism is a human-centred theology
7. Arminianism is not a theology of grace
8. Arminians do not believe in predestination
9. Arminian theology denies justification by grace alone through faith alone
10. All Arminians believe in the Governmental theory of the atonement

The corresponding realities are therefore:

1. Arminianism is more like a branch of Reformed theology than its opposite
2. Although Calvinism and Arminianism share much in common, they are distinct theological systems on a number of key points and no hybrid is possible on these points
3. Arminianism is an orthodox evangelical option and affirms all the fundamental points of the historic Christian faith
4. The heart of Arminianism is the loving and gracious character of God
5. Arminianism affirms the sovereignty of God but sees it as choosing to give human freedom rather than meticulously controlling all human choices
6. Arminianism is not an "optimistic" theology of human nature, but agrees with Calvinists that human beings are dead in trespasses and sin by nature
7. Arminianism is a doctrine of grace, recognising that no-one can come to God unless drawn by God's grace through the Holy Spirit. The difference with Calvinism being that Arminianism understands God to draw everyone in the same way and such grace to be resistible
8. Arminians believe in predestination but not unconditional election and reprobation, rather they either affirm the predestination of the church corporately or of believers through God's foreknowledge
9. Arminians strongly affirm the central Reformation insight of justification by grace alone through faith alone, including Arminius and Wesley
10. Many Arminians affirm penal substitionary atonement, including Arminius and Wesley

Late in the book, Olson says that it is incumbent when criticising a position to engage with its proponents (and indeed its best proponents) and allow them to put forward what they actually think. I have certainly been guilty of not doing this.

It seems to me that Calvinists looking to deal with Arminianism fairly could do a lot worse than use Olson's book as a reference. I only wish that Olson had done a lot more exegesis to back up the arguments for his position. Had he done so, the book would have been much more valuable.

Generous Justice

Generous Justice
Timothy Keller
Hodder & Stoughton 2010

I've pretty much enjoyed everything I've ever read by Tim Keller and Generous Justice is no exception. It seems to me that Keller's central thesis in this book is crucial in our time to the health, vitality and witness of the churches, particularly the evangelical churches, who perhaps need to hear this message most. Keller's thesis is simply that doing justice, in our daily lives as Christians at a personal, social and societal level, is a necessary outworking of the grace of God we have experienced through the gospel.

Keller writes in the introduction for example: "There is a direct relationship between a person's grasp and experience of God's grace, and his or her heart for justice and the poor...I have observed over decades that when people see the beauty of God's grace in Christ, it leads them powerfully towards justice." (p. xix).

It is immediately apparent that Keller wants to challenge several wrong views. To begin with he challenges the secular voices that claim that the Bible is somehow a hindrance to establishing justice in our world. But more interestingly from my point of view, he also challenges the still all-too-typical evangelical mindset that sees the church's true biblical role as "saving souls" and teaching correct doctrines, especially salvation by grace alone, in Christ alone, through faith alone. For too long there has been a false dichotomy in many churches between the evangelical gospel of salvation and the so-called liberal gospel of social justice. Keller is a Reformed theologian and minister of an evangelical Presbyterian church, yet he correctly sees that social justice is fundamental to the church's mission, not as a replacement for the gospel (which is where liberal Christians go wrong) but as a necessary outworking of the gospel.

The rest of the book explores a variety of angles of justice to give a rounded picture of the biblical material.

To begin with, Keller looks to define "justice" and finds that in the Bible it is about far more than simply punishing sinners. Again, too often in evangelical circles, "justice" is restricted to enforcing morality and punishing wrongdoers and we can end up looking simply like the religious equivalent of the "hang 'em and flog 'em brigade"! No, biblical justice is more akin to "social justice" that looks after the poor, the widow and the fatherless. It is about doing what is right for everyone and about living in a "harmonious peace" (as Keller defines the key Hebrew concept of shalom) with our fellow human beings and with all creation. It is about fair treatment of immigrants. It is about making sure workers are paid fair wages and work in decent conditions. The list of applications of the biblical principles could go on and on. Keller also points out that justice in biblical terms is not about doing the bare minimum of good for others, it should be generous. Why? Because when we act like that we reflect God's own character. The Scriptures say that God is on the side with the weak, the poor and the oppressed. And as we claim to be the people of God, so should we.

Later chapters highlights material from the Old Testament, especially the prophets, and the New Testament, especially the teachings of Christ himself, that all back-up the point of view outlined. Keller's treatment of the Parable of the Good Samaritan was a particular highlight.

A later chapter in the book called "How Should We Do Justice?" is very practical and very challenging. In it, Keller gets down to the nitty-gritty of actually putting the theory into practice and I found it useful when he talks about three levels of doing justice called "relief, development and social reform" and how Christians are called to involvement at all three levels. Relief is immediate help given to someone in need. Development is longer term involvement to help someone in need improve things so the need no longer exists. Social reform challenges governments to change the law and/or society to stop the situation that caused the need from happening in the first place. In the example of the old proverb, relief is giving a man a fish, development is giving a man a fishing rod and teaching him to fish, social reform questions the government why the poor have to live off fish while others have plenty to eat.

The book ends with a chapter where Keller links peace, justice and beauty and reiterates the link between the gospel of grace and living out a gospel life of grace that seeks justice for others (in the true biblical scope) and closes with a final challenge to us as Christians. In essence, if we have received so much blessing from God's hand, shouldn't we be more willing to bless others from our hands? In Keller's own words:

Proverbs 14:31 says, "He who oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker." The God of the Bible says, as it were, "I am the poor on your step. Your attitude towards them reveals your true attitude toward me." A life poured out in doing justice for the poor is the inevitable sign of any real, true gospel faith.

Now, if that doesn't challenge any Western Christian who reads it, what will?